If you have an issue with planning standards.....

[Simon]

Of course we need a national governing body otherwise there wouldn't be a sport.

Did I, or anyone else, on this thread suggest that we do not?
Yes we need a governing body.
What I am annoyed about is what seems like an attempt from the governing body to dictate what I am allowed to say in regard to the sport and how it is run.

continually deriding the naffness of the BOF site is fine but has it got to a point where we're not being constructive?

Plenty of people have offered constructive comments on it and little has happened. It is an improvment over the old site (which had become a mess of seperate sites), but there are many ways in which it could improve further. The current biggest problem seems to be finding stuff, where many are confused over how the information has been classified.

[El]

I don't think they are censoring it, just that if people want a way to complain about something and know it is being listened to and possibly changed then there are also 'official' ways to do it.

[harry]

All I think we are asking on this thread is not to censor the banter both good and bad about event planning and standards.

But pyrat was also suggesting the need for a BOF spokesperson on nope, I just think it works both ways. How important is nope to BOF? Do you think they have a point on the Agenda at every meeting;
6.2 What has been going on on the nope forums?
No, so if you want your views to really be heard then air them in the right place.

It started the same with alternativet vs SOFT. Now Niklas Wrane one of the founders of alternativet works for SOFT doing computer stuff and compiling the Swedish Rankings. It's been beneficial to both organisations to have that link. And of course people still complain about and discuss SOFT on the forums there!

[Simon]

All I think we are asking on this thread is not to censor the banter both good and bad about event planning and standards.

But pyrat was also suggesting the need for a BOF spokesperson on nope, I just think it works both ways. How important is nope to BOF? Do you think they have a point on the Agenda at every meeting;
6.2 What has been going on on the nope forums?
No, so if you want your views to really be heard then air them in the right place.

As I see it the one of the right place for me to air views to is my club committee [if I want my views to go further]. Generally the following happens:
I see (or start) a discussion on Nope about an issue.
Based on such a discussion I formulate my views on an issue.
I then pass my views on to my club committee.

The discussion on Nope is almost always a prelude to me discussing these views further elsewhere. When I discuss event standards here I am looking towards what things are being done right/wrong at events to make sure that any event I am involved is better because of it. Is this not what this forum is for? Improving the sport?

[pyrat]

it would just be some unofficial unstructured recreational activity.

most of the time it is
also, unofficial unstructured recreational activites are fun.

In terms of a spokesperson my intention was to stop these debates getting out of hand because at the moment bof is playing silent witness.

[harry]

What I am annoyed about is what seems like an attempt from the governing body to dictate what I am allowed to say in regard to the sport and how it is run.

ooH what did they do? Duck tape and a blow to the head?

Establishments run by a distinct aging group of stalwarts are usually very uneasy about change and radical ideas. So maybe they don't like nope but it seems a stronger dislike the other way.

This was about planning standards tho. Which should be upheld by the controllers. maybe it's the standard of Controllers that's to blame. How much help and advice did the Controller of the poorly planned event give to the Planner?

[gross2004]

Good point about controllers. In my experience there is little or zero educational or training effort put towards controllers. A good controller is key to a good competition - he/she should be able to guide both the planner & organiser in the right direction to met the expected standards. And note I said 'guide' not do the planners work for him

[Simon]

What I am annoyed about is what seems like an attempt from the governing body to dictate what I am allowed to say in regard to the sport and how it is run.

ooH what did they do? Duck tape and a blow to the head?

What did they do - read awk's comment (which I quote below). I make the assumption that this extends to more than just Andrew making his views known publically and also on other issues concerned with the management of the sport. To the second point: No, which is why I still make my views known.

On these issues, after my rant about Wharnecliff, I was approached by both the Chief Executive and the Chairman to say that rather than going public, I should have expressed any concerns to the chairman of Event Operations.

So maybe they don't like nope but it seems a stronger dislike the other way.

Separate dislike of the group from dislike of what they are doing.

This was about planning standards tho.

No, this discussion stemmed from a discussion on planning standards. That crops up in another thread around here.
Also, though, we must add the issue of the planner (and/or organiser) ignoring the controller's comments.

[gross2004]

One fine example of how easy it would be for BOF to get things correct:

On thier elite section.... under 2005 squad it says...

2005 Great Britain Squad Profiles The GB Squad is made up of two sections: Junior and Senior Squad. Within each Squad there are two sections, the core is known as the Performance with Development for those aiming to get into the Performance Squad

Great, perfect.... someone has obviously found the time recently to change the 2004 to 2005... easy... but why not replace the stuff about Performance & Development Squad with the news that they don't exist anymore and there is only one senior squad............ it would be sooooooooooooooo simple to do

[PorkyFatBoy]

in spite of my being rapped over the knuckles by BOF for my comments about Wharnecliff

So do the Football Association rap everyone who bitches about the dodgy refereeing decisions ?? I don't think so.

It's useful to have a proper contact point to raise genuine issues, but if BOF are objecting to us raising issues via Nope then that is another matter all together.

[bendover]

So do the Football Association rap everyone who bitches about the dodgy refereeing decisions ?? I don't think so.

umm not all of them, but a fair few, especially the managers...

[distracted]

One fine example of how easy it would be for BOF to get things correct:

On thier elite section.... under 2005 squad it says...

2005 Great Britain Squad Profiles The GB Squad is made up of two sections: Junior and Senior Squad. Within each Squad there are two sections, the core is known as the Performance with Development for those aiming to get into the Performance Squad

Great, perfect.... someone has obviously found the time recently to change the 2004 to 2005... easy... but why not replace the stuff about Performance & Development Squad with the news that they don't exist anymore and there is only one senior squad............ it would be sooooooooooooooo simple to do

It's little things like that which can make a difference in someone's perception of BOF - their website is there for information but it acts as advertisement for the sport as well. People browsing through the site may well pick up on inaccuracies. Does this alter their opinion of BOF and the sport in general??

[Mrs H.]

Or get a position on a committee yourself..

I offered to help BOF and was ridiculed for my ideas!

How important is nope to BOF? Do you think they have a point on the Agenda at every meeting;

Well actually i have had some fairly prompt, positive and concerned contact from BOF as a results of a certain topic raised exclusively on nope which leads me to believe that to a certain extent this may be what is happening behind the scenes - and lets face it - it would be breath takingly arrogant of BOF if they chose to ignore what is being said here - whether they act on it or not is another matter.

They should be extremely grateful to nope for providing them with an ear to what orienteers are actually saying - as Simon said - what he says here is just about the same as he would say in the assembly field. I don't know where Melons got the idea we were trying to abolish BOF - mind you the website is a joke - It was professionally designed yet I understand it is fatally flawed and there may have already been offers to help out there which have not been taken up - as you say - event guidelines which refer to badge and colour coded - non-existant squad divisions - no wonder everyone is confused.

But attempts to manipulate the free-flow of opinions is the thin end of a very dodgy wedge and leaves me feeling very uneasy indeed.

[awk]

Blimey, that was a bit of dust storm to kick up.

On the rapping of knuckles, I'm a fairly big boy now, and I wasn't too bothered about that. What bothered me was that I was expected to know exactly the procedure as to how to complain, and who to complain to. Without a fair amount of work on my part, I'm not quite certain how - the website is singularly uninformative on this front, and an absolute nightmare to navigate round. I could've phoned BOF office, but frankly I don't have the time most working days between 8 and 6.

My point really was that if BOF want members to follow certain procedures, then these should be clear and readily available. They're not. My posting on nopesport seemed to get the message across far more easily, and involved far less time and effort for me. That was my priority, and if BOF want otherwise, then that needs to be addressed.

On Melons' point - I do so agree about the need for an NGB, and have been involved for many years. However, one of the things that has driven home to me in the 12 or so months since I left BOF, is how little the concerns of the ordinary member are addressed. Simply, I want a programme of well planned and organised events at local, regional and national level, giving us good value for money, with information about the sport easily accessible.

As far as I can remember, most of this is one of the priority aims of the strategic plan. It just isn't happening enough for us, and we've cut back on both orienteering and the growing cost of it as a result. After recent events we'll get even more picky. I know others (mostly families) who have taken the same route as well.

[RJ]

In the Wharnecliffe postings there was considerable discussion about the standards of the planning. No harm there, in bringing shortcomings to the forum to be aired. A lot was discussed and a lot was highlighted for the general reader.

However, as was very evident in the later stages of the postings, actual individuals were being named and shamed. This was unfair to those individuals, and I think we all felt some remorse in the way they had been attacked.

It is very difficult to avoid personalising the criticism, but that is the bit we should avoid. It simply isn't fair to vilify individuals, particularly those who volunteer their time and efforts for our sporting pusuits.

If individuals are being persistently useless then there are proper channels for complaint. But the original posting of AWK's referred to yet another event where the same shortcomings were apparent. Nope is the ideal place to discuss that. The more people who are aware of what needs to change the more chance there is that we will all address those shortcomings at what ever level we operate.